October 2009 - 38

Ruling the Game
If the true agreement is that 1
is a transfer to diamonds, there is no
infraction. Law 75C (Mistaken Call)
would indicate that the director may
not change the table result so long as
the opponents have received a correct
description of the agreement (not a
description of the actual hand).

Mike Flader
Associate National
Tournament Director
rulings@acbl.org

Q

Playing in a club game
(both sides vulnerable),
the bidding went as follows:
West
North East
South
1
1 (1)
Pass
2
2
Pass
Pass
Pass
(1) Alerted.
East asked for an explanation of
the Alert. 1 was explained as a
transfer to diamonds. The transfer
bid was completed as requested.
East decided to compete with
2. The result was down four,
minus 400. All other North-South
pairs were in 2 making three
or four. The 1 bidder forgot the
transfer and really had spades.
Should an adjustment to the
score be made? Not playing the
transfer convention, the bid of 2
is non-forcing, constructive.

A

Unless specifically permitted at your club, transfer
overcalls are not legal agreements in General Convention
Chart events.

38

Q

In the last few years,
some players (especially advanced ones) have
started playing transfer
responses to a standard 1 opening. Some now routinely play that
1 can show as few as two clubs
with a flattish hand.
How would you Alert or Announce using this method? Does
the opener just say "transfer" or is
this one of those situations where
the transfer is Alertable? What if a
1 response is a transfer to 1NT?
Is there information about this
on the ACBL convention chart?
Is it pre-Alertable? Which, if any,
responses by opener are Alertable?

A

This treatment would be
legal in events governed by
the ACBL General Convention Chart only if the transfer
response is forcing to game.
This approach is permissible in
events using the ACBL MidChart:
Typically, this includes Flight A
events (stand-alone, not stratified)
and top brackets of knockouts.
Here is a link to the ACBL convention charts: www.acbl.org/assets/
documents/play/Convention-Chart.
pdf

Q

Here is a ruling I made
recently at my local game.
I wanted to get an opinion.
North-South reached a
cold 6 contract. With three cards
left in dummy, declarer says, "Why

are there three cards in dummy? I
have only two." The answer: East
started with 14 cards and North
started with 12.
Because both pairs had an offender who didn't count their
cards, I awarded average-minus
to both, citing Law 13C (Incorrect
Number of Cards; Play Completed). Was that right?

A

You were exactly correct
because both sides are at
fault. Law 13 covers this
type of infraction, while
Law 12C2 (Director's Discretionary
Powers; Awarding an Adjusted Score)
permits you to award the result you
did.
Nice job. Maybe they will count
their cards next time.

Q

If you ask for aces using
regular Blackwood and
find you are missing one,
I've been told it is illegal
to continue by asking for kings. The
reason is the opposition has a right
to know they have an ace between
them. Is this correct? If so, and
the director is called, what is the
penalty?

A

While bidding lessons
are beyond the scope of
this column, I will say this
much: There is nothing in the
Laws which prohibits players from
continuing a Blackwood sequence.
This is true regardless of the response
received.
The opposition is entitled to know
your agreements, not what is actually
in your hand. A continuation may be
bad bridge, but it is not a violation
of Law. Because this is not an infraction, the director may not adjust the
table result.
r

Bridge Bulletin
http://www.acbl.org/assets/
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2009
